General Discussion

pnwmom

(110,232 posts)

99. There was a great deal of evidence in the 2nd trial, and that evidence

Fri Jan 31, 2014, 09:28 PM

Jan 2014

was never thrown out. The high court only disputed the final conclusion of "innocent," not the evidence that was presented.

Until you can read and refute the Hellman report, you're just blowing a bunch of hot air.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

160 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

There is no Double Jeopardy when you are Convicted at your first trial. Amanda Knox is going to be [View all] Fred Sanders Jan 2014 OP

And the state department should stop it. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #1

Which would create a diplomatic row, where America is essentially telling 60 million Italians that Fred Sanders Jan 2014 #4

I think that is exactly what we should tell them. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #10

Italy is almost a thousand years older that U.S.... RichGirl Jan 2014 #33

Did I say we are better? No I did not. But if all this time they have the system they have hrmjustin Jan 2014 #39

While I agree with your sentiment that is not exactly accurate. CBGLuthier Jan 2014 #42

Italy was not an independent country until the 1860s. tritsofme Jan 2014 #50

IMO JJChambers Jan 2014 #69

Yes, and their justice system is 1000 years old. They haven't moved pnwmom Jan 2014 #90

Totally false... reACTIONary Feb 2014 #135

Your words contradict themselves. "Moving closer" to an adversarial system doesn't mean pnwmom Feb 2014 #138

Nope, not at all... reACTIONary Feb 2014 #139

Fair and modern? Except they have no understanding of logic and science. pnwmom Feb 2014 #140

I see, Itialians are... reACTIONary Feb 2014 #143

Your words, not mine. How can you defend calling a defendant "Luciferina" in a modern, fair court? pnwmom Feb 2014 #144

Ha - My words? reACTIONary Feb 2014 #145

You are incorrect. Their panels consist of two professional judges and several lay judges, pnwmom Feb 2014 #147

Thanks for the claification (nt) reACTIONary Feb 2014 #154

I don't care how old they are. Nt Adrahil Jan 2014 #92

I hate it when America criticizes Russia for discriminating against gays. BlueEye Jan 2014 #95

And what would the reason to suspect be? reACTIONary Feb 2014 #137

Remember lancer78 Feb 2014 #114

Just because something is old TBF Feb 2014 #121

On what basis? OURS? *coughOJcough* *coughZimmiecough* WinkyDink Feb 2014 #134

Double Jeopardy! hrmjustin Feb 2014 #156

The US has refused extradition requests, and been refused extradition request. Life went on, and wen LanternWaste Jan 2014 #37

Why should they stop it??? RichGirl Jan 2014 #20

After the circus they put her through I would say their system is too flawed to send her back. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #25

We can not respect Italian law as long as the Mass Media here has brainwashed most into thinking Fred Sanders Jan 2014 #49

They had little faith in it back in the 70s when I was there. hobbit709 Jan 2014 #51

The Italian justice system convicted their Prime Minister of corruption, there's that. Fred Sanders Jan 2014 #54

Only when it became so obvious and what does that have to do with the current situation? hobbit709 Jan 2014 #57

And the American justice system sent a former Attorney General to prison. Your point? 11 Bravo Jan 2014 #79

Put the shoe on the other foot ? Wash. state Desk Jet Feb 2014 #130

Actually no...she could not be guilty. (eom) StevieM Jan 2014 #110

+10 (nt) reACTIONary Feb 2014 #136

The poster joined in December and has been posting from hate sites about Amanda Knox. pnwmom Jan 2014 #88

Because you attended the trial and heard all the evidence? Or because she's "cute"? WinkyDink Feb 2014 #133

I am gay so the cute thing is oh not applicable! hrmjustin Feb 2014 #157

Locked out of your other thread, hey? nt laundry_queen Jan 2014 #2

For those that missed it... DURHAM D Jan 2014 #3

Because apparently having a contrary opinion is now objectionable on DU. Fred Sanders Jan 2014 #5

Being a sexist is truly "objectionable on DU". DURHAM D Jan 2014 #7

No because you wrre rude to another poster. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #12

Yeah, like that never happens on DU, my post was mild by comparison to many. Fred Sanders Jan 2014 #14

You have had several hides. I know because I was on mirt and saw them. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #17

If you look at the "hides" before, they were misinterpreted as I was posting in response to a topic Fred Sanders Jan 2014 #26

I did not dig around. your hides landed in my mail box. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #36

you want I should kick some hide-prone Fred ass, hrmjustin? Skittles Jan 2014 #52

lol no thats ok my friend. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #55

Now that was very civil, what say you, hrmjustin, will you report him for violence, or was it Fred Sanders Jan 2014 #60

I'll report you for claiming I am a man Skittles Jan 2014 #67

Um if you must know skittles is known for joking like this. hrmjustin Jan 2014 #71

That's Skittles's tag line, dude. Iggo Jan 2014 #107

Can I say yes on hrmjustin's behalf? stevenleser Feb 2014 #129

Wow! Are we threatening people now? brush Jan 2014 #86

Threatening? hrmjustin Jan 2014 #87

I used to rationalize my shortcomings the same way... LanternWaste Jan 2014 #40

Sexism and rudeness is "a contrary opinion"? Yes, it is objectionable on DU. uppityperson Jan 2014 #45

No. Because being a "party girl" and "sex fiend extraordinaire" doesn't make one a "murderess". cherokeeprogressive Jan 2014 #63

Her legal team is preparing an appeal. So I doubt extradition will be an issue for a sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #6

I agree, it will be 90 days before the judgment details are released and Knox may well be in her Fred Sanders Jan 2014 #9

How about ohheckyeah Jan 2014 #8

and the rule thereof! (nt) TacoD Jan 2014 #78

Give it up, Fred. countryjake Jan 2014 #11

I am just analyzing the verdict from the point of view of 2 out of 3 Italian tribunals, but if that Fred Sanders Jan 2014 #13

Two to go Fred. You can do it. HERVEPA Jan 2014 #21

This is analyzing?? countryjake Jan 2014 #30

You're confusing analysis with editorial... hyperbole aside. LanternWaste Jan 2014 #41

There was a great deal of evidence in the 2nd trial, and that evidence pnwmom Jan 2014 #99

I'm not sure why he should 'give it up' Astrad Jan 2014 #34

The sites he's been linking to are hate sites filled with misinformation. pnwmom Jan 2014 #100

There are a ton of problems with this case including the burden of proof Gothmog Jan 2014 #101

There is at least one DUer claiming to be a lawyer pnwmom Jan 2014 #106

Italy still functions under a Napoleonic system nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #113

Napoleonic Code jurisdictions are very strange and US concept of due process do not apply Gothmog Feb 2014 #118

In a non politized case in Mexico nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #119

In the four times I've seen this one article posted today... Lost_Count Jan 2014 #15

Posted four times? Where and by who? Fred Sanders Jan 2014 #18

Well it seems you were at least one of them in your own thread before... Lost_Count Jan 2014 #32

your obsession with Knox is disturbing cali Jan 2014 #16

One man's obsession is another man's truth, I am simply in agreement with the Italian court verdict. Fred Sanders Jan 2014 #19

over and over again, apparently lapfog_1 Jan 2014 #53

Amanda called. She's sorry she stood you up on Prom Night and hopes that you can get over it. 11 Bravo Jan 2014 #83

Based on what evidence? alarimer Jan 2014 #89

Just admit it - Spirochete Feb 2014 #131

Well, she is quite the looker. Throd Jan 2014 #31

The vitriol directed at him Astrad Jan 2014 #38

Exactly. Many seem to just hate the Italian justice system on the basis of one case, that is what Fred Sanders Jan 2014 #44

Haha! Cooley Hurd Jan 2014 #48

uh, no. starting thread after thread on her is just weird. cali Jan 2014 #64

Why the innuendo? Astrad Jan 2014 #72

Yep! Cooley Hurd Jan 2014 #46

I don't know anything about Fred... reACTIONary Feb 2014 #142

Thanks for the shout out, but I do not have any extradorinary understanding of the Italian legal Fred Sanders Feb 2014 #148

Why would she "face the music in Italy" for a bogus trial sked14 Feb 2014 #149

Truly, the trial where she was convicted was not perfect, the DNA trail is sketchy, doubts remain Fred Sanders Feb 2014 #150

The bottom line is why should she go back to a country sked14 Feb 2014 #151

My take on it is simply that Italian law and process has to be respected by the government Fred Sanders Feb 2014 #153

Aren't you the one who started this thread? sked14 Feb 2014 #152

I am not judging the judgment, only that the judgment is supportble by the evidence and on the basis Fred Sanders Feb 2014 #155

So after getting locked out of your previous thread, you're starting over? hobbit709 Jan 2014 #22

The real issue is the burden of proof Gothmog Jan 2014 #23

A criminal laywer, with trial and appeal experience in the criminal courts? Fred Sanders Jan 2014 #27

I have been a lawyer for 30+ years Gothmog Jan 2014 #43

The criminal standard of burden of proof in Italy is this: Fred Sanders Jan 2014 #47

This is a very weak explanation Gothmog Jan 2014 #59

No one is going to force her to go to Italy flamingdem Jan 2014 #24

You REALLY have a thing for Amanda Knox tkmorris Jan 2014 #28

In think the State Department shoulkd stop it gopiscrap Jan 2014 #29

Refresh my memory. Did we extradite these guys? tkmorris Jan 2014 #35

good point questionseverything Feb 2014 #128

No request of extradition by Italy was ever made, so no. Fred Sanders Feb 2014 #132

The Italian court seems like a joke, playing to local sympathies. stg81 Jan 2014 #56

Yes, like the Florida jury that aquitted Zimmerman, that kind of playing to local sympathies? Fred Sanders Jan 2014 #61

ignore stg81 Jan 2014 #62

For some reason I find your cock-suredness amusing. Just sayin'. WillowTree Jan 2014 #58

He's a guilter and based on his use of language pnwmom Jan 2014 #91

Yeah, I noticed that. WillowTree Jan 2014 #97

I wonder atreides1 Jan 2014 #102

There are a number of these very rabid posters, and other people pnwmom Jan 2014 #104

I just gotta say, sked14 Jan 2014 #105

Thank you, sked14. I didn't get interested in this till after they'd been convicted pnwmom Jan 2014 #108

That's exactly what I was thinking and have been thinking this since I first saw the beginnings of Ecumenist Feb 2014 #115

Good grief! bravenak Jan 2014 #65

At least this OP doesn't have 22 edits. hobbit709 Jan 2014 #66

I see he got locked out of the last one. bravenak Jan 2014 #68

"Calling out" another poster is actually against DU rules that you seem to respect ever so much. Fred Sanders Jan 2014 #70

You do not understand what a call-out is REP Jan 2014 #74

When did I ever say I respected rules? bravenak Jan 2014 #75

There is no call out rule on DU. DURHAM D Jan 2014 #77

Thanks. bravenak Jan 2014 #80

You can't find what isn't there. DURHAM D Jan 2014 #82

Right. bravenak Jan 2014 #85

Wrong. DURHAM D Jan 2014 #76

And how would a 200 post, 90 day poster be familiar with old DU rules? X_Digger Jan 2014 #81

LOL DURHAM D Jan 2014 #84

LOL!!! n/t pnwmom Jan 2014 #93

And yet bravenak was convicted by an Italian court of brazen calling-out. Dr. Strange Jan 2014 #96

Where do I turn myself in? bravenak Jan 2014 #109

Because you deserve the best... uppityperson Jan 2014 #103

Lawyers will fight this out in court if Italy requests extradition, which (I'd guess) won't happen struggle4progress Jan 2014 #73

For the honest truth about this case... countryjake Jan 2014 #94

Let me know when we extradite Robert Lady Savannahmann Jan 2014 #98

Nice arguement, does your point fit ITALIAN LAW? rustydog Jan 2014 #111

Correct me, if I do not remember my legal system correctly, nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #112

Thanks for the info. Iggo Feb 2014 #116

We called consulates, nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #117

Good post Gothmog Feb 2014 #120

Of course, you link to two debunked sites. mainer Feb 2014 #122

You really should read the Massei Report, the original trial conviction, there is link Fred Sanders Feb 2014 #123

And you should read what a veteran FBI agent says about the EVIDENCE mainer Feb 2014 #124

I understand the defence postion, that it was only one person involved, the one convicted, but Fred Sanders Feb 2014 #125

How about talking to THESE forensic/FBI experts? mainer Feb 2014 #126

Here's someone who DID read the Massei Report mainer Feb 2014 #127

She DID turn you down for that date snooper2 Feb 2014 #141

I'm not qualified to argue law, but I can say with some confidence she will not be extradited. wyldwolf Feb 2014 #146

wait a minute...this isn't huffington post! madrchsod Feb 2014 #158

From a legal standpoint, I think the fact that the case against Knox is so weak is an issue Gothmog Feb 2014 #159

Not gonna happen. Iggo Feb 2014 #160